It is a self-important man who constantly insults people via 4/5 syllable phrases, runs down people he disagrees with in academic rantings and then cries "foul" when others return the favor. ProfLogic is an oxymoron (seeming not a professor nor logical). His latest statements (such as about perfect randomness) betray someone who loves to use big words because he thinks it makes him sound learned, as well as parroting things he has seen elsewhere. Unfortunately, his scholarly grasp is often paper thin. His admiration for Jack, a 2-bit circus performer with a tired out act, only drops his credentials in the eyes of better informed ETers. I spent a few years in grad school, around 170-180 other Comp Sci/Math grad students and several dozen faculty. I rarely heard these individuals, especially the professors, run others down like ProfLogic. I would love to run some of this statements on ET by his fellow faculty members, if he is even a professor at all.
This is a really STUPID thread, but I feel argumentative today: Sure it can prove TA. You don't know, how many trades he did last week. If he did let's say 200 (I know he didn't, but that is beside the point) trades and with those he had a 18+% weekly return, that is way more than ENOUGH statistical data, ask any statisticans... Now since he trades infrequently, he could have said, YTD he is up by using TA, that also should be enough evidence. Oh, by the way, my journal is up 130 ES points YTD, using you guess it right TA, with sufficient number of trades for any statisticans...I am just lazy to count the trades, feel free to do so... [rant mode off]
cheflogic claims to have created a "new science" of price motion physics. do you understand this "new science"? is this what you are saying?? surf
I know that Spyder trades profitably, as for Jack I know someone in Tucson that will attest to his trading success. Anything over an above that and I do not care. I trade for myself and my success is priority one. Maybe I should have said a new way of looking at old parameters. My stuff is so unique it provokes a few to stammer and become irrational in here. Of course I don't care about them either. Everyone has an opinion and a right to defend it. I met a research scientist this weekend that was part of a private study to disprove the viability of hydrogen fuel. After 5 years he gave up and now works for the HO Team. He said that the others, still on the study, are some of the most respected in their fields and in his opinion . . . idiots. What I know about hydrogen fuel, I would have to agree. Any new research will always be met with resistance especially when those resisting refuse to look at the research or they think someone not up to their social status had something to do with it. Human nature is a wonderful thing to watch play out.
Any statistician who understands investment would actually laugh. You can't take a day's worth of trades, say "well, it is a sample size of at least 30, therefore it is statistically significant, therefore I am 93% confident that TA works." You are taking one trader out of millions, taking one day or week of his trades, accepting his word that all of that performance was due to TA, so that wraps it up. Such statisticians would be on the floor, rolling in laughter. TA has already been pretty much beaten into submission by people who do large samples of trades over DECADES, using many different permutations of entries. The BEGINNING of using a trader's work, would be for the trader to reveal their particular TA "logic" to a statistician, and have him/her run it for say, 30-50 years, over many markets, and many instruments. THAT is statistically significant. However, the TA aficianados on this site prefer to snort at such vast samplings that have already been done, and point ever onward at anecdotes, testimonies and other irrelevant things to "prove" TA. Next?
I said I respect Jack, I said nothing about admiration. Those are totally different. Jack has opinions and I respect them. Scary you don't understand that level of courtesy. I'm glad you spent a few years in grad school. Higher learning, in most cases, sparks original thought. Yours is probably still incubating. May I ask how much personal unbiased research you have done in the markets? I only ask because everything you state comes canned in any number of books on math or statistics. You say you are a Computer Science major but yet have a minimal grasp of logic, the strict foundation of programming. There is no room for subjectivity or discretion in strictly defined logic but somehow you interject it into your comments. My email is readily available. Please have your facility members contact me directly as to assure there is nothing omitted in the translation.
marketsurfer Registered: Apr 2002 Posts: 9760 08-20-07 08:18 PM remember, this is from the person who invented a "new science" of price motion physics. surf ________________________________________________ And this from a person that thinks those that produce the food we eat are "HICKS", is scared to death to confirm what he condemns and impersonates women just to talk to himself. . . . but I'm crazy! Ok, you win Mr. President. P.S. Thanks for the forward Paul.
Promise, this will be the last one on this thread... Most people on this thread don't get about TA, the title of the thread is an overgeneralization. You can not make such a broad statement, because it is pretty much meaningless. It is like saying surgery doesn't work. Sure lots of people die during surgery but lots of them survive. Depends on what sample one uses, etc.